Combination ceftaroline and daptomycin salvage therapy for complicated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia compared with standard of care

Link to article at PubMed

Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2021 Feb 18:106310. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2021.106310. Online ahead of print.


Complicated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections (MRSA-BSIs), particularly those with delayed culture clearance, are associated with high mortality. Combination therapy with daptomycin and ceftaroline (DAP+CPT) represents a novel therapeutic approach to MRSA-BSI owing to synergistic bactericidal activity. This study aimed to compare DAP+CPT with historical standard of care (SoC) for treatment of complicated MRSA-BSI. This single-centre retrospective cohort study included patients with complicated MRSA-BSI at University of Colorado Hospital. Patients receiving DAP+CPT for ≥48 h between November 2013 and March 2020 or SoC with vancomycin or DAP ± gentamicin and/or rifampicin from November 2011 to December 2013 were compared. The primary outcome was clinical failure defined as a composite of MRSA-related mortality and recurrent infection at 60 days. A total of 60 patients received DAP+CPT (n = 30) or SoC (n = 30). Median age was 56 years and median Pitt bacteremia score was 3. Common infectious sites were endovascular (63%) and musculoskeletal (40%). DAP+CPT was associated with a numerically lower incidence of clinical failure compared with SoC (20% vs. 43%; P = 0.052). Multivariable analysis controlling for immunocompromised status (OR, 6.90, 95% CI 1.08-44.15), Charlson comorbidity index (OR, 1.12, 95% CI 0.90-1.39) and source control (OR, 0.35, 95% CI 0.08-1.46) associated DAP+CPT with 77% lower odds of clinical failure (OR, 0.23, 95% CI 0.06-0.89). In patients with complicated MRSA-BSI with delayed clearance, DAP+CPT trended towards lower rates of clinical failure than SoC and was significantly associated with decreased clinical failure after adjustment for baseline differences.

PMID:33609718 | DOI:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2021.106310

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *